Building America Program Review April 24-25, 2013

Evaluation of Ducted GE Sarah Widder Hybrid Heat Pump Water Heater in PNNL Lab Homes

1 | Building America eere.energy.gov Project Partners

Key PNNL Staff: – Sarah Widder, Engineer, Principal Investigator – Viraj Srivastava, Engineer, Demand Response Lead – Vrushali Mendon, Engineer, Energy Modeling – Nathan Bauman, Engineer, Metering

Partners: – Brady Peeks, Engineer/Manufactured Homes; Northwest Energy Works – Jonathan Smith/Scot Shaffer, Engineers/Software & Hardware; GE Appliances – Greg Sullivan, Principal/Metering & Analysis; Efficiency Solutions – Valerie VanSchramm, CPS Energy

Co-Funders: – Bonneville Power Administration, Emerging Technologies Program – DOE, Office of Electricity

2 | Building America eere.energy.gov Lab Homes Partners

• Initial Partners – DOE/BT/Building America-ARRA – DOE/BT/Windows and Envelope R&D – Bonneville Power Administration – DOE/OE – PNNL Facilities – Tri Cities Research District – City of Richland – Northwest Energy Works – WSU-Extension Energy Program – Battelle Memorial Institute (made land available)

3 | Building America eere.energy.gov Primary Problem or Opportunity: National Energy Savings from HPWHs

• Water heaters account for 18% of energy used in homes, or 1.8 Quads of energy use annually.1 • Electric resistance water heaters make up 41% of all residential water heaters in the U.S.1 • Heat pump water heaters (HPWH) can provide up to 62% energy savings over electric resistance water heaters.2 • 50% market penetration of HPWHs would result in savings of approximately 0.08 Quads annually. 1 EIA; 2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey 2 Based on the DOE test procedure and comparison of an electric tank water heater (EF=0.90) versus a heat pump hot water heater (EF=2.35)

4 | Building America eere.energy.gov Primary Problem or Opportunity: Lack of Market Penetration

• Currently, market adoption and utility program incentives of HPWHs are limited due to lack of understanding and field data regarding: – Impact on space conditioning energy consumption and occupant comfort. – Impact on demand response programs. – Durability in harsh water conditions.

5 | Building America eere.energy.gov Primary Problem or Opportunity: The Role of This Research Project

• Evaluation of HPWHs in a highly controlled environment will help achieve market penetration of HPWHs through creation of a detailed data set that will comprehensively describe the performance of HPWHs installed in conditioned space in a number of configurations and as a demand response asset. Experiment Whole House HVAC HPWH Temperature/ RH Power/Energy Power/Energy Power/Energy at Several Use [kWh or kW] Use [kWh or kW] Use [kWh or kW] Interior Locations* [°F/%] Impact of Whole house Incremental HVAC Impact of ducting Impact of exhaust exhaust ducting energy savings systems energy and exhaust fan ducting on use/savings on HPWH occupant comfort efficiency PNNL Lab Impact of supply Whole house Incremental HVAC Impact of supply Impact of supply Homes and exhaust energy savings system energy ducting and and exhaust Experiments ducting use/savings supply air temp on ducting on HPWH efficiency occupant comfort Demand Whole house N/A HPWH power *Tank temperature response power reduction reduction during decrease during characteristics during DR events DR events DR events

• This information is necessary to support regional efficiency and manufactured housing programs and encourage more widespread adoption of HPWH nationally.

6 | Building America eere.energy.gov Overview of Technology: HPWHs • HPWHs work by transferring heat from the ambient air to the water in the tank. • This process provides more energy to the water than it uses in electricity. – Tested Energy Factors (EF) for HPWHs available on the market range from 1.7 to 2.4.3 3 Ecotope; 2011 Source: U.S. DOE; energysavers.gov

7 | Building America eere.energy.gov Overview of Technology: HPWHs in Conditioned Space

• HPWHs installed in interior space will use conditioned indoor air HPWH to heat water. – Benefit during cooling – Penalty during heating Interior Exterior – May affect comfort Summer Winter Summer Winter HP COP 2.3 – 2.5 3-5 1 DHW • Performance of 1,650 Energy 2,500 kWh/yr 0 kWh/yr HPWHs installed Savings outside will have Impact on +800 to reduced performance. Space -0 to 200 2,200 0 Energy kWh/yr – Most HPWH kWh/yr Use compressors do not Total operate below 40-45 F.3 300 to 2,600 kWh/yr 1,650 kWh/yr Savings

3 Ecotope; 2011

8 | Building America eere.energy.gov Overview of Technology: HPWHs with Exhaust Ducting

• Modeling has found ducting exhaust to effectively mitigate some adverse space conditioning impacts in Northern Climates. – Resulted in NEEA Northern Climate HPWH Specification requiring exhaust ducting for Tier 2 products. Northern Climates ≥ 4000 HDD and Average Ambient Temp < 60F

• Requires data to verify model assumptions and findings.

9 | Building America eere.energy.gov Overview of Technology: Supply Ducting

• Newton’s 2nd Law – Reduced impact with exhaust ducting relies on buffering from semi-conditioned spaces. – Will result in depressurization with respect to outside. • This may be a problem for small homes (e.g., manufactured homes) and homes in high radon areas.

• NEEA Tier 3 Spec requires optional supply ducting and Northwest Energy Efficient Manufactured Home (NEEM) Specification may require similar. – No products are currently available with this configuration. – Ducting directly from outside will result in decreased HPWH performance.

• Need to verify performance of HPWH with supply ducting to crawlspace.

10 | Building America eere.energy.gov Overview of Technology: HPWH Demand Response Characteristics

• Many utilities currently employ electric resistance water heaters to shave peak load by turning off the water heater (INC). • PNNL has also demonstrated the potential of using HPWHs to increase load (DEC) for areas with high renewable penetration and to provide additional balancing and ancillary (voltage regulation) services. • Need to understand demand response characteristics of HPWHs as compared to electric resistance water heaters, including “dispatchable kW,” “thermal capacity,” and “response time.”

11 | Building America eere.energy.gov Overview of Technology: HPWH Durability in Hard Water

• Utilities and consumers are concerned about lifetime of HPWHs in areas with hard water – HPWHs typically have anode rods installed to neutralize hard water and delay tank corrosion. – Information is not widely available for what ranges of hard water conditions anode rods are designed for or how they affect HPWH lifetime and cost effectiveness.

12 | Building America eere.energy.gov Vision of Success

• Clear guidance on the optimal installation of HPWHs in all climates and configurations. • Adoption of HPWHs as a fully-approved measure in BPA service territories and into other utility incentive programs, particularly in cold climates and areas with hard water. • Consideration of HPWHs for High-Performance Manufactured Homes (HPMHs) in the Pacific Northwest that go beyond the current Northwest Energy Efficiency Manufactured Home (NEEM) specifications. • Adoption of HPWHs into utility demand response product portfolios. • HPWHs are installed as “standard” technology for electrically-heated homes across the nation and contribute to 50% energy saving solutions in new and existing homes.

13 | Building America eere.energy.gov Business Plan Linking Research to Industry/Market

Research results will:

Present data to Present results to Provide installation Regional Technical research community guidance in BASC Forum and builders

Justify and/or Inform HPWH support models and Provide modification of enable Northern industry with Northern Climate Climate Tier 3 installation best Spec and PNW product with practices Incentives supply ducting

14 | Building America eere.energy.gov Key Metrics for Each Year of Funding Anticipated

2013 • Verification and documentation of energy savings, load-balancing potential, and performance of: – energy and occupant comfort impacts of new HPWHs without ducting, with exhaust ducting, and with supply and exhaust ducting, – HPWH demand response capabilities, and – HPWH performance in hard water conditions. • Development of specifications for HPWH appropriate for adoption into utility incentive programs, particularly in cold climates and areas with hard water. • Production of data set to inform HPWH model calibrations. Beyond • Development of climate- and housing type-specific guidance for HPWH installation to maximize savings in all climate zones and configurations. • Collaboration with manufacturers to develop market-ready supply ducted units, as appropriate.

15 | Building America eere.energy.gov 2011 Primary Accomplishments

• Sited and commissioned PNNL Lab Homes • Held Road-mapping Workshop

16 | Building America eere.energy.gov 2012 Primary Accomplishments

Highly Insulating Windows Experiment • Side-by-side assessment in the PNNL Lab Homes demonstrated that highly insulating windows: – Save approximately 13% on whole house energy use – Reduce peak demand 25% in the summer – Improve thermal comfort through more consistent interior temperatures and higher surface glass temperatures – May decrease the risk of condensation and mold issues in regions with high humidity – Still have long PBPs - from 23 to 55 years. • Cost effectiveness could be improved through reduced costs, valuation of non-energy benefits, and accounting for system-level savings (e.g., downsized HVAC systems and optimized duct design).

17 | Building America eere.energy.gov Research Adjustments Based on Past Findings

• Despite budget and schedule implications of changing terms of cooperation with GE, the experimental plan and scope have not changed. • It is important to check data daily to ensure quality and make quick adjustments.

18 | Building America eere.energy.gov 2013 Strategy to Achieve Research Goals: Steps

• Install two second-generation GE GeoSpring Hybrid HPWHs in the conditioned space of the two PNNL Lab Homes, which will allow for side- by-side comparison of the HPWHs in various configurations with identical Modify simulated occupancy patterns to isolate the performance and effects of Lab Homes the HPWHs from all other variables.

• Coordinate with existing and ongoing verification efforts by PGE, BPA, GTI, EPRI, NEEA, NREL and others to better understand HPWH interaction with the conditioned space and validate models, such as Coordinate BeOpt, to better predict HPWH performance in different climates.

• 3 Thermal Experiments, 1 DR Experiment, 1 Hard Water Evaluation Conduct • Ongoing QA/QC of data and experimental set up Experiments

19 | Building America eere.energy.gov Technical Underpinnings Targeted: #1 - #3: Thermal Experiments

Experiment Lab Home A Lab Home B Purpose of Experiment Configuration Configuration #1: 50-gallon electric 50-gallon GE Characterize performance and HP vs. ER resistance5 Hybrid HPWH interaction with HVAC for HPWH as compared to ER baseline #2: 50-gallon GE 50-gallon GE Characterize performance of Ducted vs. Hybrid HPWH Hybrid HPWH ducted HPWH vs. identical Unducted with no ducting with exhaust unducted HPWH to isolate the ducting impact of ducting on whole-house and HVAC energy consumption, thermal comfort, and HPWH performance #3: 50-gallon GE 50-gallon GE Characterize interaction of HPWH Fully Ducted Hybrid HPWH Hybrid HPWH on infiltration and house vs. Unducted with no ducting with supply pressurization for fully ducted and ducting (from unducted scenarios and impact crawl) and using tempered crawlspace air as exhaust ducting supply air

5 Electric resistance baseline will be GE Hybrid HPWH in ER only mode.

20 | Building America eere.energy.gov Technical Underpinnings Targeted #4: Demand Response Experiments • Evaluate demand response characteristics of this smart- grid−enabled HPWH compared to electric resistance baseline during variety of demand response events:

Exp Name Experiment Description Time Duration Purpose of Experiment Evaluate HPWH load shedding potential (dispatchable AM Load kW and thermal capacity) as compared to electric Shift Turn off heating elements 7:00 AM 3 hours resistance baseline to manage peak load Evaluate HPWH load shedding potential (dispatchable PM Load kW and thermal capacity) as compared to electric Shift Turn off heating elements 2:00 PM 3 hours resistance baseline to manage peak load Evaluate HPWH load shedding potential (dispatchable EVE Load kW and thermal capacity) as compared to electric Shift Turn off heating elements 6:00 PM 3 hours resistance baseline to manage peak load 2:00 AM; Evaluate HPWH potential to provide balancing reserves 8:00 AM; for (dispatchable kW and thermal capacity) as compared INC 2:00 PM; 30 to electric resistance baseline Balancing Turn off heating elements 8:00 PM minutes DEC 30 Balancing Set tank temp to 135 F 2:00 AM minutes DEC Turn on ER in Lab Home Balancing A; HP only in Lab Home 30 N/A; HPWHs should stay in appropriate mode V2 B 2:00 AM minutes throughout test (Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B = HP)

21 | Building America eere.energy.gov Technical Underpinnings Targeted #5: Hard Water Experiments

• PNNL will work with GE and CPS Energy in San Antonio, Texas, to evaluate HPWH performance and durability in hard water conditions. This research question is of particular interest to CPS Energy, who would like to incentivize HPWHs due to their ideal climate but is concerned about the effect of the local hard water on the units. – Phase I: Literature review and manufacturer interviews to better characterize problem and current building science knowledge. – Phase II: Conduct any necessary additional data collection to fill identified gaps in understanding. This may include deploying HPWHs to San Antonio (contingent on outyear funding).

22 | Building America eere.energy.gov 2013 Research Goals and Metrics

Thermal Experiments: • Quantification of the tradeoffs between space conditioning impact and HPWH performance and identification of the optimal installation of HPWHs in conditioned space, which minimizes whole house energy use and does not adversely affect occupant comfort. – Whole house, HVAC, DHW energy use, and thermal comfort impacts in each configuration.

Hard Water Evaluation: • Characterization of current understanding of HPWH longevity in regions with hard water.

Demand Response Experiments: • Evaluation of HPWH demand response characteristics for load shedding and balancing reserve events. – Dispatchable kW, inherent capacity reduction, response time and duration, delivered hot water temp.

23 | Building America eere.energy.gov

Questions?

24 | Building America eere.energy.gov Back Up Slides

25 | Building America eere.energy.gov Null Testing

• Building construction comparison – Homes’ air leakage (CFM air flow @50Pa) was within 5% – Homes’ duct leakage (CFM air flow @50Pa) was within 2%, similar distribution performance – Heat pumps’ performance similar ΔT across coil and air handler flow within 6% – Ventilation fans’ flows within 2.5% – Thermal conductivity with IR camera shows settling of R-11 batt insulation in 2x6 wall cavity in both homes.

SUMMARY DATA Baseline Home Experimental Home Average +/- Error Average +/- Error Value Value CFM@50 783 27 824 27 ACH50 3.77 0.1285 3.965 0.13 * ACHn 0.18 0.01 0.18 0.01 *n = 21.5, based on single story home in zone 3, minimal shielding

26 | Building America eere.energy.gov Hot Water Draw Profile

• LBNL Meta- analysis1 of 159 homes found: – 122.7 F average tank set point – Majority of draws between 1 and 1.5 gpm – Majority of draws between 1 and 4 minutes in length – “High,” “medium,” and “low” daily water draws of

29.38, 60.52, Profile Daily Hot Water Use [gal/day] 98.04 gal/day Building America House Simulation Protocol 78.51 (4 people) BPA Evaluation 81 gal/day (3 people) 1 Lutz and Melody; 2012 Canadian Test Standard 67.2 gal/day PNNL Lab Homes 69.28 (3 people) 27 | Building America eere.energy.gov LBNL Draw Profile Meta-analysis

• Median Daily Outlet Temp = 122.7F

28 | Building America eere.energy.gov LBNL Draw Profile Meta-analysis

29 | Building America eere.energy.gov LBNL Draw Profile Meta-analysis

30 | Building America eere.energy.gov LBNL Draw Profile Meta-analysis

31 | Building America eere.energy.gov Prior Lab Testing (Ecotope, 2011)

HPWH COP versus Ambient Temperature Tier 1, <= 55 gal Tier 1 > 55 gal Tier 2 (both sizes) 3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50 COP

1.00

0.50

0.00 27 32 37 42 47 52 57 62 67 72 77 82 Ambient Temperature (deg F)

32 | Building America eere.energy.gov RTF Overall Savings Estimates

• Impact on house heating + cooling system depends on climate, exhaust airflow, and HVAC system type • Combining DHW energy savings with heating + cooling impact produces the overall energy savings estimate • 5 scenarios in 4 climates considered on next slide: – Interior non-ducted (0 cfm flow to outside) – 4 levels of exhaust ducting to outside • 150, 200, 250, and 300 cfm

33 | Building America eere.energy.gov Heating System Interaction

Zonal Resistance Heat (kWh/yr) Electric Resistance Furnace (kWh/yr) CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 300 -1283 -1252 -1514 -1764 300 -1464 -1428 -1741 -2036 250 -1029 -1003 -1222 -1431 250 -1173 -1143 -1399 -1641 200 -839 -817 -1006 -1184 200 -953 -927 -1146 -1349 150 -664 -646 -799 -943 150 -751 -730 -906 -1072 0 -1415 -1415 -1479 -1597 0 -1608 -1606 -1688 -1830

Heat Pump HSPF 8.5 (kWh/yr) Gas Furnace AFUE 90 (therms/yr) CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 300 -790 -731 -1142 -1542 300 -68 -66 -83 -98 250 -617 -572 -888 -1195 250 -54 -53 -66 -78 200 -491 -454 -701 -961 200 -46 -44 -56 -67 150 -379 -351 -539 -741 150 -35 -33 -42 -51 0 -609 -590 -731 -892 0 -62 -62 -64 -68

• CFM is airflow ducted to outside (“0” corresponds to no ducting) • Negative values are a heating system debit

34 | Building America eere.energy.gov Cooling System Interaction

• None for houses without cooling system (Zonal Resistance and Electric Furnace) • Cooling savings for ducted installations nearly negligible but not so for nonducted ones

Heat Pump SEER 13 (kWh/yr) Gas Furnace w A/C: SEER 13 (kWh/yr)

CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 300 20 20 20 20 300 19 19 19 19

250 18 18 18 18 250 18 18 18 18

200 17 17 17 17 200 17 17 17 17

150 16 16 16 16 150 16 16 16 16

0 153 153 153 153 0 152 152 152 152

• CFM is airflow ducted to outside (“0” corresponds to no ducting) • Positive values are a cooling system benefit

35 | Building America eere.energy.gov Analysis Outputs: Combined Savings Tables

Zonal Resistance Heat (kWh/yr) Electric Resistance Furnace (kWh/yr) CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 300 662 692 428 197 300 484 520 206 -70 250 917 942 722 531 250 776 806 549 327 200 994 1016 825 666 200 884 909 690 506 150 1145 1163 1009 884 150 1063 1083 907 761 0 538 537 474 374 0 349 350 270 147

Heat Pump HSPF 8.5 (kWh/yr) Gas Furnace AFUE 90 (kWh/yr) CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 CFM PNW HZ1 HZ2 HZ3 300 1090 1155 698 284 300 1829 1837 1778 1756 250 1263 1314 952 632 250 1839 1847 1791 1771 200 1267 1311 1014 744 200 1726 1734 1675 1657 150 1352 1387 1149 935 150 1706 1714 1656 1640 0 1407 1433 1248 1071 0 1970 1976 1930 1914

36 | Building America eere.energy.gov PNW Modeling: DHW Savings with Combined Interaction

Zonal Resistance Heat (kWh/yr) Electric Resistance Furnace (kWh/yr)

2000 2000 1750 1750 1500 1500 1250 1250 1000 PNW 1000 PNW 750 HZ1 750 HZ1 500 HZ2 500 HZ2 250 HZ3 250 HZ3 0 0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Estimated Savings (kWh/yr) Savings Estimated Estimated Savings (kWh/yr) Savings Estimated Airflow Ducted to Outside (CFM) Airflow Ducted to Outside (CFM)

Heat Pump HSPF 8.5 (kWh/yr) Gas Furnace 90 AFUE w/ SEER 13 Cooling

2000 2000 0 PNW 1750 1750 -20 1500 1500 HZ1 -40 1250 1250 HZ2 1000 PNW 1000 -60 HZ3 750 HZ1 750

-80 (therms/yr) 500 HZ2 500 PNW (therms) 250 HZ3 250 -100 Interaction Therm HZ1 (therms) 0 0 -120 HZ2 (therms)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Estimated Savings (kWh/yr) Savings Estimated Estimated Savings (kWh/yr) Savings Estimated HZ3 (therms) Airflow Ducted to Outside (CFM) Airflow Ducted to Outside (CFM)

37 | Building America eere.energy.gov BPA Demand Response Product Characteristics

Product details DR Product 1 DR Product 2 DR Product 3 DR Product 4 Within-hour load decrease for non- Within-hour load increase for non- Heavy load hour to light load hour shift Load decrease for capacity/peak shifting spinning balancing reserves (INC) spinning balancing reserves (DEC) for oversupply with BPA and utility dispatch Primary Use Additional balancing reserves for wind Additional balancing reserves for wind Oversupply mitigation Transmission and distribution congestion integration integration management and deferrals, utility peak avoidance Dispatched By BPA BPA BPA Contractually separate dispatch by BPA and participating utility Expected Beneficiaries Variable energy resources (VERs) Variable energy resources (VERs) Variable energy resources (VERs) BPA Transmission, participating utility

Dispatch Period 10 minutes 10 minutes 60 minutes Within-hour (BPA) Day-ahead (utility) Seasonality Year-round Year-round March - July Year-round

Duration Up to 90 minutes Up to 90 minutes Up to 6 hours Up to 4 hours

Maximum Hours Annual Usage 300 180 480 300

Expected Cost FY13-15 $6-7 kW/month $1-3 kW/month $4-5 kW/month $4-5 kW/month (as add-on to DR Product 1) Expected Cost at Scale $3-5 kW/month TBD - no current full-scale programs TBD - no current full-scale programs $3-5 kW/month

Current Comparative Cost VERBS rate (FBS-based): VERBS rate (FBS-based): OMP cost estimate: Demand charge for LF customers: $7.68 kW/month $2.07 kW/month $40-50 MW/hour $9.62 kW/month Future Comparative Cost Combustion gas turbine: TBD - no current market-ready TBD - no current market-ready Combustion gas turbine: $17.63 kW/month alternative alternative $17.63 kW/month Estimated expected BPA Benefit 100% 100% TBD - based on project-specific TBD - based on project-specific expected benefits analysis expected benefits analysis Estimated expected Utility Benefit 0% 0% TBD - based on project-specific TBD - based on project-specific expected benefits analysis expected benefits analysis

Notes: . Cost estimates based on benchmarking and market research with DR providers . Initial cost allocation estimates based on assessment of each product by DR Cost Allocation Team comprised of Power and Transmission Rates staff . Actual cost allocation for each project will be determined by analyzing its expected benefits; if expected benefits are not clear upfront, costs will be allocated based on principles determined by the IRTP Cost Allocation Team and approved by the ASF

20 38 | Building America eere.energy.gov Schedule Table

Task Description Task Alias Subtask Alias Start Finish Days 1 Project Management Plan (PMP) PMP 12/1/2012 1/4/2013 34 2 A Modify Lab Homes and Install Equipment Baseline Install 1/4/2013 2/24/2013 51 2 B Baseline Testing Baseline 2/24/2013 3/12/2013 16 3 B Baseline Testing Baseline 3/31/2013 4/20/2013 20 3 A Heating Season Exp #1 (ER v. HPWH) Heating Exp. Exp #1 11/1/2013 11/9/2013 8 11/30/201 3 B Heating Season Exp #2 (Exhaust Duct) Exp #2 11/9/2013 3 21 11/30/20112/21/201 4 Heating Season Exp #3 (Supply&Exhaust) Exp #3 3 3 21 5 Demand Response DR Demand Response 5/1/2013 5/31/2013 30 6 A Cooling Season Exp #1 (ER v. HPWH) Cooling Exp. Exp #1 6/1/2013 6/20/2013 19 6 B Cooling Season Exp #2 (Exhaust Duct) Exp #2 6/21/2013 7/9/2013 18 7 A Cooling Season Exp #3 (Supply&Exhaust) Exp #3 7/10/2013 7/30/2013 20 10/31/201 7 B Sensitivity Experiments Additional Exp 9/1/2013 3 60 12/21/201 8 Final Report Final Report Dev. Approach 3 1/31/2014 41 9 TI Council Meeting Presentation TI Council Mtg 1/14/2014 1/31/2014 17

39 | Building America eere.energy.gov PNNL HPWH DR Testing Schedule Mode to Return to after Day Date Exp Signal 1 Time Duration Signal 2 Time Duration Signal 3 Time Duration Signal 4 Time Duration event(s) AM Load Turn off heating 7:00 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 1 TBD Shift elements AM 3 hours N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A = HP AM Load Turn off heating 7:00 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 2 TBD Shift elements AM 3 hours N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A = HP AM Load Turn off heating 7:00 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 3 TBD Shift elements AM 3 hours N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A = HP PM Load Turn off heating 2:00 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 4 TBD Shift elements PM 3 hours N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A = HP PM Load Turn off heating 2:00 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 5 TBD Shift elements PM 3 hours N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A = HP PM Load Turn off heating 2:00 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 6 TBD Shift elements PM 3 hours N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A = HP EVE Load Turn off heating 6:00 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 7 TBD Shift elements PM 3 hours N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A = HP EVE Load Turn off heating 6:00 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 8 TBD Shift elements PM 3 hours N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A = HP EVE Load Turn off heating 6:00 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 9 TBD Shift elements PM 3 hours N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A = HP INC Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 10 TBD Balancing elements AM minutes elements AM minutes elements PM minutes elements PM minutes = HP INC Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 11 TBD Balancing elements AM minutes elements AM minutes elements PM minutes elements PM minutes = HP INC Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Lab Home A = ER; Lab Home B 12 TBD Balancing elements AM minutes elements AM minutes elements PM minutes elements PM minutes = HP DEC 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 13 TBD Balancing Set tank temp to 135 F AM minutes elements AM minutes elements PM minutes elements PM minutes DEC 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 N/A; HPWHs should stay in 14 TBD Balancing Set tank temp to 135 F AM minutes elements AM minutes elements PM minutes elements PM minutes appropraite mode throughout DEC 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 test (Lab Home A = ER; Lab 15 TBD Balancing Set tank temp to 135 F AM minutes elements AM minutes elements PM minutes elements PM minutes Home B = HP) Turn on ER in Lab DEC Home A; HP only in 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 16 TBD Balancing V2 Lab Home B AM minutes elements AM minutes elements PM minutes elements PM minutes Turn on ER in Lab DEC Home A; HP only in 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 17 TBD Balancing V2 Lab Home B AM minutes elements AM minutes elements PM minutes elements PM minutes N/A; HPWHs should stay in Turn on ER in Lab appropraite mode throughout DEC Home A; HP only in 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 Turn off heating 2:00 30 Turn off heating 8:00 30 test (Lab Home A = ER; Lab 18 TBD Balancing V2 Lab Home B AM minutes elements AM minutes elements PM minutes elements PM minutes Home B = HP)

40 | Building America eere.energy.gov